South African Journal of Education, Volume 37, Number 1, February 2017 1

Art. # 1334, 11 pages, doi: 10.15700/saje.v37n1a1334

Empowering principals to lead and manage public schools effectively in the 21st century

Raj Mestry
Department of Education Leadership and Management, Faculty of Education, University of Johannesburg, South Africa
rajm@uj.ac.za

“Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world” (Nelson Mandela, 1994)

Globally, education systems have been affected by radical social, political and economic changes. Although school
principals play a pivotal role in improving student learning and attaining educational outcomes, they work under strenuous
conditions to deal with multifaceted transformational issues. Principals experience great difficulty in coping with numerous
changes, partly because they are inadequately prepared for their leadership position, or simply lack the necessary skills,
knowledge and attitudes to lead and manage schools effectively and efficiently. Fundamentally, principals should be
empowered to effectively deal with challenges facing them in the 21st century. Using qualitative research, this study
explored the importance of promoting a culture of professional development that will prepare principals to confront
education challenges and obstacles facing them. Fifteen principals were selected to determine their perceptions and
experiences of how they were prepared and professionally developed to lead and manage schools. Findings revealed that in
South Africa, there is no formal preparation for aspiring or practicing principals taking on leadership and management
positions, and very few in-service professional development programmes are available. There is a dire need for education
authorities to introduce compulsory training and development programmes for aspiring and practicing school leaders to lead
and manage their schools successfully.

Keywords: change management; continuing professional development; curriculum leadership; instruction; principalship;
professionalization; qualifications; training

Introduction and Background to the Problem

In many emerging economies in developing countries, substantial investments have been made in education,
with the hope of generating a highly skilled labour force and high proportion of employment. Despite these
investments, there is growing concern globally that many public schools are not functioning at their optimum,
and that learner performance is generally of a low standard. However, many nations around the world have
undertaken wide-ranging reforms of curriculum, instruction, and assessment, with the intention of better
preparing principals for the educational demands of life and work in the 21st century (Bush, 2005; Russell &
Cranston, 2012). The rapid rate at which changes have taken place, and are still taking place, together with the
increased volume of administrative work, has placed principals under enormous pressure (Kinney, 2009).
Managing change is complex, and usually an elusive process. According to Thurlow, Bush and Coleman (2003),
it is difficult to explore potential approaches to managing change in the troubled and exhilarating context of
South Africa. Changes in the new system of governance in schools have unfortunately resulted in principals
being unprepared for their new role as ‘chief executive officers’ (Department of Education (DoE), 1996:18).
Principals may also experience difficulty in adapting to their new roles and new channels of communication
which results in role ambiguity (Dimmock & Hattie, 1994, cited in Heystek, 2016). Perhaps one of the major
changes in the principalship has been the range of expectations placed on them and these expectations have been
moved from the demands for management and control to the demand for an educational leader who can foster
professional development among staff (Mestry & Grobler, 2004; Steyn, 2002). Bottery (2016:98) argues that
principals find themselves working extra hours, “not just on weekday evenings but also at weekends and during
school holidays, […] where the job becomes unsustainable if they do not”.
It is important for principals to understand leadership as a process and to develop human relation skills and
promote joint action to ensure school improvement and effectiveness (Steyn, 2009). According to Starr (2009),
the role of the principal now equates with that of a chief executive officer (CEO) of a corporate organisation
responsible for strategic planning, budgets, managing industrial relations, procuring resources and facilitating
marketing and public relations. Botha (2004) asserts that the principal’s role in the new educational dispensation
represents a balance between instructional leadership and management: leadership deals with areas such as
supervising the curriculum, improving the instructional programme of the school, working with staff to identify
the vision and mission for the school, and building a close relationship with the community. Management, on
the other hand, includes factors such as supervising the budget, maintaining the school buildings and grounds,
and complying with educational policies and acts. Many practicing principals lack basic leadership and
management training prior to and after their entry into principalship (Bush & Oduro, 2006; Heystek, 2016).
Tsukudu and Taylor, (1995, cited in Bush & Oduro, 2006:362) assert that “head teachers come to headship
without having been prepared for their new role. As a result, they often have to rely on experience and common
sense”. However, such are the demands being made upon leaders and managers now, including head teachers,
2 Mestry
that acquiring expertise can no longer be left to
common sense and character alone; leadership and
management development support is needed (Bush
& Oduro, 2006; Mestry & Singh, 2007).
Globally, the poor academic standards at
school level could be amongst other reasons, sym-
ptomatic of a lack of effective leadership and
management in schools (Spaull, 2013). Kallaway
(2009:10) posits that “(t)he crisis that has been
predicted by many experienced educationists ever
since the early ’90s is finally reaching such tragic
proportions that we have to face the real prospect
of a ‘lost generation’ that we never imagined in the
past”. At national level, researchers concur with the
belief that many principals lack the relevant know-
ledge and skills to lead their schools effectively
(Mestry & Singh, 2007) and this has had serious
implications for learner performance. There is thus
a dire need for education authorities to continually
develop and support principals so that they can
effectively lead schools. This study is thus im-
portant to inform practice and policy on imple-
menting such professional development systems in
countries undergoing transformation, as well as
those with scarce resources and a high level need,
as change should be managed prudently for or-
ganisational effectiveness. This study is also likely
to contribute to the body of change knowledge in
education and the advancement of theory pertaining
to change in human resource development.
In South Africa, for example, in 2011, learner
achievement in the Annual National Assessment
(ANA) report remained poor: Grade Three learners
achieved a pass rate of 35% in Literacy and 26% in
Numeracy while Grade Six learners achieved a
pass rate of 28% in Language and 30% in Math-
ematics (Joseph, 2011). Students also fared poorly
in the recent National Senior Certificate (Grade 12)
Examinations and the National Systemic Tests
conducted by the (DoE) to Grade Three learners
(2002) and Grade Six learners (2004) in Nu-
meracy/Mathematics and Literacy Examination.
The average pass rate for the National Senior
Certificate in 2012 was 73.9 percent. These
startling statistics only serve to confirm the poor
performance of learners across the board (Bloch,
2009; Fleisch, 2008). The relationship between
school leadership and educational outcomes has
been well documented (Bush, 2005). Principals,
head teachers and deputy principals are normally
held accountable for students’ academic per-
formance. Goslin (2009) argues that principals tend
to overlook their responsibilities of curriculum or
instructional leadership, because they are not fully
aware of their primary task, or they are too busy
attending to their administrative duties, and either
resolving conflicts among role players or main-
taining student discipline. There is thus a dire need
for principals to be empowered and professionally
prepared for their roles as heads of schools, and to
continually enhance their skills, attributes and com-
petencies through structured continuing profession-
al development (CPD) programmes.
The research problem explored in this article
is: How do principals perceive and experience their
own professional development to enhance their
leadership roles? The following questions were
posed to direct this study: what is understood by
CPD and of what importance is CPD to principals;
and, how can principals be empowered to become
effective leaders by participating in formal CPD
programmes?
A Changing Profile of School Leadership:
Continuing Professional Development
Professional development (PD), continuing pro-
fessional development (CPD) and in-service train-
ing (INSET) are used interchangeably to refer to all
types of professional learning undertaken by prac-
ticing or aspiring principals beyond the point of
initial training (Craft, 2000). Some professionals
consider CPD as training, as a means of keeping
abreast, or as a way of building a career, while
professional associations hold the view that CPD is
part of lifelong learning; a means of gaining career
security; a means of personal development; a
means of assuring the public that individual pro-
fessionals are up-to-date; a method whereby
professional associations can verify competence;
and a way of providing employers with a com-
petent and adaptable workforce (Friedman &
Phillips, 2004).
CPD can be interpreted as a structured app-
roach to learning that will facilitate competence to
practice by intensifying knowledge, skills and
practical experience. CPD in school education
consists of any educational activity which helps to
maintain, develop or increase knowledge, problem-
solving skills, technical skills or professional
performance standards, all with the goal of pro-
viding quality education. CPD can involve any
relevant learning activity, whether formal and
structured or informal and self-directed. Day and
Sachs (2004) and Hirsch (2009) describe CPD as
all those activities in which educators engage
during the course of a career, which are designed to
enhance their work. They argue that this may be a
deceptively simple description of a hugely complex
intellectual and emotional endeavour, which is at
the heart of raising standards of teaching, learning
and achievement in a range of schools, each of
which poses its own set of special challenges.
Education leadership and management should be
seen as a process where the development of edu-
cation leaders and the achievement of organi-
sational goals are synchronised (Mestry & Grobler,
2004). The process of development is mainly
concerned with equipping principals to acquire and
improve the necessary competencies to lead and
manage their schools effectively (McLay & Brown,
 South African Journal of Education, Volume 37, Number 1, February 2017
2003). According to Guskey (2002), high-quality
professional development is a central component in
nearly every modern proposal for improving
education. While proposed professional develop-
ment programmes vary widely in their content and
format, most share a common purpose: to alter the
professional practices, beliefs, and understanding
of school principals toward the achievement of
school goals, namely, the improvement of student
learning. Professional development programmes
are systematic efforts to bring about change in
school leadership and management where new
behaviours, attitudes and beliefs contribute to the
learning outcomes of students.
Many progressive countries have placed CPD
for school leaders high on the education agenda. In
the United Kingdom (UK), for example, the
challenge of training school leaders has been
accorded the highest priority of any social goal. At
the insistence of the former Prime Minister Tony
Blair, his staff was directed to benchmark inter-
national practices and find leading experts on the
topic to advise the government (Roe & Drake,
1980:272). In the United States of America (US),
CPD programmes are usually offered by external
agencies. For example, the Wallace Foundation, a
national philanthropy organisation based in New
York City provides, among other, school leadership
training for head teachers. It attracts high-quality
candidates and provides free, high-quality pro-
fessional development for successful teachers and
assistant principals interested in improving their
leadership skills and possibly becoming a principal
(The Wallace Foundation, 2013). The idea is to
create a pathway to school leadership for effective
teachers and other top instructors, who may not
have considered the job of headship. The Canadian
government, using the Energising Ontario Edu-
cation model of improving education through more
effective school leaders, developed a coherent
leadership strategy to provide adequate contextual
support for school leaders (OECD, 2010; Schlei-
cher, 2012). In Singapore, successful potential
school leaders are selected to attend the Manage-
ment and Leadership in Schools programme at
Singapore’s National Institute for Education, based
on interviews and leadership-situation exercises.
Once accepted, aspiring school leaders can attend
the four-month executive leadership training.
Potential vice principals attend a six-month ‘Lead-
ers in Education’ programme. Candidates in both
programmes are paid during their training. Only 35
people are selected for the executive leadership
training each year (Mourshed, Chijioke & Barber,
2010, cited in Schleicher, 2012). It is thus crucial
for the South African education authorities to
attract and select prospective principals with the
right leadership and management qualities to lead
public schools. Prospective and practicing prin-
cipals should be afforded the opportunity of
3
participating in formal professional development
programmes so that they can effectively adapt to
their roles and responsibilities, which are changing
radically. According to study undertaken by Bush
and Heystek (2006) and Piggot-Irvine, Howse and
Richard (2013), South African principals require
development in supporting networks, policy issues
and interpersonal skills, and place a strong focus on
their administrative, financial and human resource
management role.
Theoretical Framework
Theories in change management have been used as
frame for this study. Change denotes making or
becoming distinctly different and implies a radical
transformation of character or replacement with
something else. Applied to the principals’ pro-
fessional development, change is the process of
transforming the schools’ organisational practices
into new behaviours that support a shared vision of
achieving the institutions’ goals. The basic frame-
work followed in this study to examine this change
process was Kurt Lewin’s Force Field Model
(1951) to embrace change and achieve organi-
sational goals (Robbins & Judge, 2010). According
to Senior (2002:308), Lewin’s Force Field Model
states that “organisations are held in equilibrium by
equal and opposing, driving and resisting forces”.
The driving forces may include competitive
pressures, legislative mandates, new technology,
and environmental factors. Kurt Lewin’s Force
Field Model (1951) advocates three stages (Queen-
Mary & Mtapuri, 2014):
 Unfreezing: In this stage principals have to reflect
on their current practices before they adapt new
behaviours.
 Moving or Changing: Principals consider making
changes that will most likely contribute to achieving
the organisational goals of their schools.
 Refreezing: Once changes are effected, new be-
haviours become apparent through what is observed
within the organisation.
In the case of this study, it is evident that the
government’s legislative mandates are the driving
force in organisational changes at public schools.
Resisting forces include established customs and
practices, teacher union agreements and the
organisation’s culture. Senior (2002:308) argues
that the main focus of the “unfreezing stage is
centred on changing the principal’s habitual modes
of thinking” as a result of new legislation, diversity
in school population and technological advance-
ment, to heighten awareness of the need to change.
Thus, there is a definite need to move away from
established behaviours to create new behaviours.
Once the principal has chosen a course of action,
he/she has to share insights about the problem, its
probable causes, and the identified solutions with
school management teams (SMTs), teachers,
school governing bodies (SGBs) and other stake-
holders of the organisation. Moving (change) is the
4 Mestry
second stage of the process that essentially makes
the actual changes. Principals embark on pro-
fessional development programmes that will move
the principal to new types of behaviour. Van der
Westhuizen (2002) agrees that movement involves
the development of new norms, values, attitudes,
and behaviour through the identification of changes
in the structure. In the refreezing stage, the prin-
cipal’s behaviours become apparent where a
“shared vision” could inspire the participation to
attain the desired future goals of the institution
(Senge, Kleiner, Roberts, Ross, Roth & Smith,
1999). The third stage (refreezing) becomes app-
arent when changes are observed within the
organisation.
Aim and Objectives of the Study
The primary aim of this study was to explore the
perceptions and experiences of practicing prin-
cipals of their professional development, and how
this enhanced their leadership roles. This aim was
encapsulated by the following objectives, namely
to:
 advance a clear understanding of continuing pro-
fessional development and its importance for
principals; and
 empower principals to become effective leaders as a
result of gaining access to and participating in for-
mal CPD programmes.
Research Design and Methodology
An interpretivist qualitative research methodology
brought to the forefront the varied experiences and
perceptions of principals of their preparation for
leadership positions and participation in profession-
al development programmes. Standardised open-
ended qualitative questionnaires followed by
individual interviews were the main data-gathering
tools used to explore the unique nature of prin-
cipals’ experiences and perceptions of CPD. The
standardised open-ended interviews were structured
in terms of the wording of the questions that
allowed the participants to contribute as much
detailed information as they desired (Gall, Gall &
Borg, 2003; Kvale, 2007). With open-ended ques-
tions, participants were free to respond in their own
words, and their responses were comprehensive.
The individual interviews allowed the researcher to
clarify participants’ responses and to delve deeper
in order to gather data-rich feedback from the
sampled principals (Creswell, 2007). The inter-
views allowed principals to communicate areas of
concern with regard to their professional develop-
ment, and provided the researcher with oppor-
tunities to request clarification.
Purposive sampling methods were used to
select fifteen principals of public primary and
secondary schools in three education districts in the
Gauteng Province of South Africa: Gauteng West,
Gauteng East and Johannesburg Central. The sam-
pled participants included males and females who
had served as principals for more than three years
at these schools. These principals headed schools
that were situated in inner cities, townships and
affluent suburbs. After receiving consent from the
participants, individual interviews were conducted
in their offices after school hours. Each interview
lasted between 45 and 60 minutes, until data
saturation was reached and no new information
emerged. The interviews were conducted in no
particular order or district, but was dependent on
the availability of the participants.
Data were analysed for content, broadly using
Tesch’s method of open coding (Creswell, 2014) in
order to identify themes or categories. Tesch’s
method provided a systematic approach to the
analysis of the qualitative data. The data was
reviewed to establish value, depth and richness.
Data was analysed by reading the transcriptions,
giving attention to patterns and commonalities,
while validity was established. The data was then
linked with the research aims and objectives, in
order to establish whether these had been achieved.
This then involved the identification of topics, the
use of coding into categories, and the emergence of
themes. The study adhered to strict ethical require-
ments. Consent was requested from the Gauteng
Department of Education (GDE) and principals of
the selected schools. Participants were ensured of
their anonymity, and were made aware that they
could withdraw from the research at any time. To
ensure confidentiality, no personal information
would be revealed without the participants’ con-
sent.
Lincoln and Guba’s (1985) norms of
trustworthiness, namely, credibility, transferability,
dependability and confirmability (Shenton, 2004)
were considered relevant for this study. Prolonged
engagement, triangulation, member checks and
peer debriefing were used to promote confidence
that the researcher had accurately recorded the
phenomena under investigation (credibility). Trans-
ferability was addressed through purposive sam-
pling and through the provision of rich descrip-
tions, which allowed the researchers to gain a
proper understanding of the phenomenon under
investigation. Regular checks were done with the
participants to ensure the accuracy of data collec-
tion (member checks), that is, transcription of
interviews was given to each participant to verify
(Shenton, 2004).
Findings
The collected data were analysed and three themes
emerged: The significance of principals enriching
their qualifications; Principals’ access to CPD
programmes; and self-evaluation and personal
professional development. The principals’ res-
ponses have been coded as follows: FGW denotes
Principal F of Gauteng West, GGW, Principal G of
Gauteng West, etc.; AGE signifies Principal A of
 South African Journal of Education, Volume 37, Number 1, February 2017
Gauteng East, BGE, Principal B of Gauteng East,
etc.; and JJC represent Johannesburg Central,
Principal J, and KJC, Principal K of Johannesburg
Central, etc.
Theme 1: The Significance of Principals’ enriching
their Professional Qualifications
Although most of the participants complied with
the basic requirement of holding a three year teach-
ers’ diploma, and had seven years teaching ex-
perience when they were appointed as principals,
they had subsequently improved their qualifications
by either completing an Advanced Certificate in
Education (ACE), or postgraduate studies at ter-
tiary institutions. These qualifications empowered
them to deal with pertinent administrative, staffing,
and teaching and learning matters, by improving
their basic qualifications.
Principal BGE explained that “the B.Ed
(Hons) afforded me the necessary skills to deal with
legal and curriculum management issues, while the
M.Ed endowed me with relevant knowledge and
skills in strategic planning and setting medium and
long-term goals”, IGW concurred with BGE that
“the B.Ed (Hons) boosted my self-esteem in data
informed decision-making … and I can analyse and
interpret data for strategic planning and support”.
FGW, who before completing the ACE (Education
Leadership) in 2014, stated:
I realised that my knowledge was compromised
and very limited pertaining to management and
leadership. I found out that I did not understand
what it meant to manage education change …
through this course I was able to acquire deep
updated knowledge, which involved complex skills
adapted for every circumstance.
JJC, who completed the ACE and B.Ed (Hons) in
Leadership and Management, and is currently
reading for her Master’s, confirms the above view:
The qualifications I obtained definitely keeps me
updated and affords me the relevant skills and
knowledge to deal with everyday, complex sit-
uations. I am also of the view that principals must
be continually trained to keep abreast of latest
developments. [all sic]
LJC waxed lyrical of the ACE qualification that she
recently obtained:
This programme changed the whole school set up
to become an enabling environment for effective
teaching and learning. It has also helped me to
bring all stakeholders that are designed to support
the school to work as a collaborative structure … it
has empowered me, together with other School
Management Team (SMT) members, to improve
teaching and learning. [all sic]
Some of the participants believed that improving
their qualifications, combined with their experience
in school management positions, contributed to
them being effective leaders. Principal DGE, who
is also currently reading for her Master’s degree in
Education Leadership and Management, submitted
that “my eight years’ management experience as
5
head of department (HoD) and my qualifications
contributed significantly to my successfully leading
the school”. She emphasised that the module,
Organisational Behaviour at M.Ed level harnessed
her skills in managing the change environment.
MJC had passed through the ranks of head of
department (HoD) and deputy principal before he
took on the principalship position. Although he
acquired numerous qualifications, he felt that his
experience as HoD provided him a strong foun-
dation to effectively lead a school. This is what he
shared with me:
I gained experience as a manager in my
department. I monitored the work of teachers and
gave reports to my principal. In 1996, I was
promoted to deputy principal, that time I got more
experience of managing the school, because our
principal was on and off, because he was sick. I
became ready to lead a school. In 2003, I was
promoted as a principal in this school, and I
registered for the ACE course in leadership, which
assisted me in growing to be a good leader. [all
sic]
HGW, who holds a Doctorate in Education, claims
that it is through many years of teaching experience
and interaction with different cultures and people in
different countries, that prepares one adequately for
the principalship position.
Theme 2: Principals’ Access to CPD Programmes
CPD for principals is emphasised in the Integrated
Quality Management System (IQMS) informed by
Schedule I of the Employment of Educators Act,
No. 76 (Republic of South Africa, 1998). The
Minister of Basic Education is mandated to
determine performance standards for teachers and
SMTs that evaluate their performance in schools.
The IQMS consists of three programmes aimed at
enhancing and monitoring performance of the
education system (Education Labour Relations
Council (ELRC), Resolution 8 of 2003). These
include Developmental Appraisal (DA); Perform-
ance Measurement (PM); and Whole School
Evaluation (WSE). The district offices have the
overall responsibility of advocacy, training and
proper implementation of the IQMS. CPD is an
aspect of DA, which aims to appraise individual
educators in a transparent manner, with the view to
determining areas of strength and weakness, and to
draw up programmes for individual professional
development. DA is designed to provide support
for continued growth, and to promote account-
ability. As part of the process, a principal should
select his/her immediate line manager (district
official) and a peer (principal of another school) to
serve in his/her Development Support Group
(DSG), and they are responsible for the principal’s
professional development. JJC expressed her con-
cern of the IQMS process:
I am not happy with the manner the CPD is
managed, whereby I have to report on my Personal
6 Mestry
Professional Development Plan. I am of the view
that my immediate senior, who is the Circuit
Manager, ought to report on my behalf, based on
the know-how during the monitoring exercise
conducted on principals, because it is time-con-
suming to gather evidence and do the reporting in
June and November of each academic year. [all
sic]
Responses of most principals revealed that edu-
cation districts have not attached any importance to
CPD for principals. Most of the development
programmes arranged by education districts deal
mainly with curriculum changes such as the
National Curriculum Statement (NCS), Revised
National Curriculum Statement (RNCS) and Curri-
culum and Assessment Policy Statement (CAPS).
In some districts, ad hoc development programmes,
such as school governing body (SGB) training and
financial management workshops were provided.
AGE asserts that:
I attended very few Department/External CPD
programmes in the last two years. I don’t really
know if the training and meetings, like the SGB
training that I attended, were CPD programmes… .
To my knowledge very few programmes were
offered. If there are many CPD programmes
offered by the GDE, obviously it is not well
communicated. [all sic]
These CPD programmes had limited benefits for
principals who required training and development
in matters relating to leadership and management.
However, IGW had high regard for the Department
and articulated the following:
(They) play a pivotal role in ensuring quality
development of principals to ensure quality
curriculum delivery, and effective leadership and
management. Through facilitating continuous pro-
fessional development and training, the department
is successful in keeping principals abreast on
current education developments and offering a
platform for principals to develop and support
each other. [all sic]
MJC shared a similar reaction:
The Department of Education is playing a leading
role in registering principals for readiness to lead.
I was registered in school leadership as mentioned
above. The department carried all the costs for this
course. I have also registered with South African
Principals Association (SAPA) which assists us to
be the best leaders. The department also sent me to
London with another principal and district director
to visit other schools there. It was a very good
initiative. We are also partnering with those
schools. [all sic]
Regarding the quality of CPD programmes offered
to principals, it would appear that most of the
workshops organised by education districts ranged
from below par to mediocre, and most programmes
delivered were mainly “one size fits all”. Accord-
ing to Darling-Hammond and Richardson (2009),
the ‘workshop’ professional development model
that the Department applies is generic, and usually
ineffective. The needs of the participants were not
considered at all. LJC expressed serious reservation
about the CPD programmes facilitated by the
education district offices. The programmes he att-
ended, “offered nothing new, as these were aimed
at newly appointed SGBs and principals – a one
size fits all”. BGE expressed similar sentiments:
I have attended some workshops such as CAPS and
Information and Communications Technology
(ICT) training. At the moment, it is a ‘one size fits
all’ approach by the Department, and they are
seemingly working on specific programmes as
requested by specific educators and schools. At the
moment, the CPD programmes are not catering for
our personal needs. [all sic]
This opinion was also shared by principals CGE
and DGE. NJC shared her thoughts on the role of
the education districts:
The Department’s role on CPD for principals is
not satisfactory. As a new principal, only one CPD
programme was conducted last year (that I failed
to attend due to family commitments). The work-
shop had its focus on curriculum management.
According to those who did attend and from the
material distributed, it was quite informative. Since
it was the only programme for the year (2015), the
maximum of 80 hours was not reached as required
by the Personnel Administrative Measures (PAM)
as it was only a three day workshop. This was a
‘one size fit all’ workshop where individual areas
of development was not taken into consideration.
The quality of the content during the three days
were very mediocre. [all sic]
GGW shared the same views as most of the other
participants:
CPD programmes are imposed on principals.
There should be a strong desire from the part of
leaders to acquire knowledge, skills and strategies
to excel in their profession. The programme, such
as Coaching and Mentorship, were imposed on
principals, and were in my opinion of low quality,
waste of money, and added no value to the
development programmes. [all sic]
CGE concurred with the feelings expressed by
other principals. She indicated that:
(The) Department held workshops normally arising
on a need-to-know basis. For example, if a new
circular is sent by Head Office, then our district
conducts a workshop to bring it to our attention.
These workshops are usually conducted in school
halls, which are overcrowded. [all sic]
CPD programmes are also offered by external
agencies. These include tertiary institutions, non-
governmental organisations (NGOs) and the South
African Council for Educators (SACE). KJC was
involved with training and development arranged
by external agencies such as Matthew Goniwe
School for Leadership and Governance (MGSLG)
and the University of Johannesburg. JGW was not
very positive about the role of some of the NGOs:
Although MGSLG and other institutions of higher
learning have been offering programmes specifi-
cally crafted to develop principals, this has not
necessarily translated into acquired skills to effec-
tively administer, lead and manage schools (par-
ticularly high schools). This is, in my view, because
they are one size fits all kind of programmes, and
 South African Journal of Education, Volume 37, Number 1, February 2017
for that reason fall short to equip principals with
skills to deal with daily demands and challenges in
their jobs. [all sic]
FGW expressed high regard for SACE. She asserts
that the SACE is:
… involved in providing CPD programmes for
leaders. SACE contributes to helping leaders to
acquire knowledge which is continuously updated,
widened and involve skill building to strengthen the
capacity of leaders along understanding and de-
velopment, and to renew their commitment and
dedication to their profession … [all sic]
FGW shared her views on trade unions:
[they] also provide professional development
workshops to improve knowledge and skills, but
some of their programmes … are being politicised
and no monitoring of the process.
MJC indicated that she:
attended at Penreach for computer studies; we go
there once a month from nine hrs to 13hrs. For the
past three years I have been busy with Penreach;
doing management workshops and computers. This
has been most beneficial to me. [all sic]
AGE provided a suggestion that:
… the Department should do a survey to find out
what are our needs, and then base their training
and development on these needs. They or external
agencies can develop training programmes that are
custom built. [all sic]
BGE also provided an idea:
Ongoing professional development is a must for all
educators and needs to be done before (own
emphasis) a leader takes up a position. I improved
my qualifications and this has prepared me to take
on leadership positions. [all sic]
Theme 3: Self-Evaluation and Personal
Professional Development
Based on the IQMS policy, principals are also
required to reflect on their own practice and
determine their own professional needs. Although
most principals complied with the requirement of
self-evaluation, this process was seen merely as a
paper exercise, and not taken seriously. A possible
reason for the apathy is that performance manage-
ment is linked to a one percent salary increment,
and the DSG (the immediate line-manager and
peers) are hesitant to give principals a low rating.
All the participants were thus positive that self-
evaluation is conducted on an on-going basis.
However, there was very little evidence that most
of the principals’ personal professional develop-
ment programmes were initiated. Some indicated
that they did not depend entirely on the education
districts to provide professional development
programmes. Principal JGW explained:
I chose to develop myself instead of waiting for the
Department’s CPD programmes to be implement-
ed. I attended training sessions arranged by the
Education Leadership Institute of the University of
Johannesburg. I attended workshops on Education
Policy and Law and Financial Management. I also
had the opportunity of attending a series of work-
shops on the role of SMT arranged by MGSLG and
7
University of Johannesburg. These sessions pro-
vided me with new perspectives of how to deal with
leadership and management matters. [all sic]
Principal CGE concurred with JGW:
CPD programmes offered by the Department of
Education have contributed to a limited extent to
my development as a leader or manager. However,
I do feel that my own initiatives to develop myself
professionally have contributed, to a large extent
and more effectively, to my development as an
effective leader. When challenges arise or when I
feel the need to know more about certain aspects I
am much more capable of doing online and other
media research; and this has boosted my con-
fidence, and in turn my capability to lead. I have
invited specialists from tertiary institutions to
provide me personal professional development. All
the costs were borne from my personal income. [all
sic]
Principal KJC, who attended numerous workshops
on leadership and management organised by local
universities, indicated that she was afforded the
opportunity to network with other principals and
“copy good practice”. She added that:
Looking at the state of the school at the time I was
appointed and now, I see a remarkable improve-
ment in the way learning materials are presented,
involvement of educators in outcomes assessments,
recordkeeping, governance, attitude of teachers
towards their work, learner discipline, and par-
ents’ involvement in all school matters. This could
only be achieved by taking the initiative of
professionally developing myself. [all sic]
Discussion
The findings indicate that leadership preparation
and training are central to school effectiveness and
school improvement. The participants unanimously
agreed that they were appointed as principals
without having any professional training or formal
preparation for their principalship position. In
South Africa, there are no rigorous criteria for
educators to be appointed as school principals
(Bush, Kiggundu & Moorosi, 2011; Townsend &
MacBeath, 2011). Currently, South Africa is one of
the few countries that do not require a compulsory
and specific qualification for principalship (Van der
Westhuizen & Van Vuuren, 2007), unlike countries
such as the UK and US, that have national
qualification structures in place (Quong, 2006;
Walker & Qian, 2006). In the US, a teacher is only
eligible to apply for the principal’s post once he/she
has completed the Master of Educational Ad-
ministration degree (Tucker & Codding, 2002). In
the UK, teachers who wish to continue up the
career ladder first become senior teachers or deputy
heads, and thereafter work with the principal as a
member of the senior management team. With an
average of about five years’ experience as a deputy,
they can apply for headship posts. According to the
Employment for Educators Act (Republic of South
Africa, 1998), an applicant should at least hold a
three year teacher’s diploma (REQV 13) and seven
8 Mestry
years teaching experience. This implies that a post
level one teacher may be appointed as principal on
the recommendation of the school governing body
(SGB), without having any leadership and manage-
ment qualifications or experience (e.g. passing
through the ranks of head of department or deputy
principal).
The Ministry of Education has made nu-
merous attempts to raise the professional standards
and competencies of school principals by
formulating the South African National Profession-
al Qualification for Principalship (DoE, 2004). This
draft policy identifies a number of key principles
that ought to inform a national professional quali-
fication for existing and aspiring principals. More
recently, the South African Standards for Prin-
cipalship (SASP) (Department of Basic Education
(DBE), Republic of South Africa, 2014) has been
sent out for public comments with the hope of
making the Standards for Principalship, legislation.
Government should, in collaboration with various
education stakeholders, enforce the SASP as
policy. The DoE recognises the current lack of a
co-ordinated system to meet these identified needs,
and is therefore seeking to develop and implement
a system of career pathing for education leaders
and managers, and a framework of leadership and
management development processes and pro-
grammes. It is envisaged that these will be built
upon agreed understanding of the core purposes of
the leadership roles, the key functions within these,
the values which underpin them, and the personal
and professional attributes required to carry out the
role. The key functions in line with the core duties
and responsibilities of the principals are clearly
described in the IQMS policy document.
From responses of the participants, it is
evident that the education districts attach very little
importance to the CPD of principals. Most of the
workshops facilitated by education districts deal
with disseminating policy matters relating to
curriculum changes and administrative matters in-
stead of focusing on the needs of principals.
Principals therefore seek other agencies (e.g. uni-
versities and NGOs) to access relevant professional
development programmes to enhance their skills
and knowledge to effectively lead and manage
schools. The Ministry of Education consider CPD
for educators to be crucial and has subsequently
entrusted SACE with the management of CPD in
public and independent schools (SACE, 2013).
SACE emphasises that like all professionals, teach-
ers and SMTs (including principals) require deep
knowledge, which is continuously updated and
widened, and which involves complex skills that
need to be continually adapted to new circum-
stances. As part of a process, each educator will
have a personal Professional Development Port-
folio (PDP) developed according to SACE
guidelines.
The third theme dealt with self-evaluation.
The participants explained the purpose of a self-
evaluation, namely, to inform them of their
personal goals and the need for professional
development. Piggot-Irvine (2010) asserts that
although the complexity of the principal’s role
provides challenges for such principal develop-
ment, there is an increasing awareness of approach-
es worthy of consideration. For example, the
principal’s self-evaluation on instructional leader-
ship determines whether the principal satisfactorily
develops and implements a school improvement
plan that results in increased learner achievement;
working with teams to develop realistic and
attainable goals regarding learner achievement;
implementing a system for monitoring learner
progress and staff performance on an ongoing
basis; providing feedback to staff for continuous
improvement and growth; and selecting instruction-
al programmes that meet specific school needs. If
deficiencies in any of these attributes are noted,
then professional development in these specific
areas are required. It is evident that progressive
principals take the initiative of arranging their own
professional development programmes, based on
needs, instead of relying on the Department’s ‘one
size fits all’ professional development programme.
Murphy, Elliot, Goldring and Porter (2007:187)
assert that “effective school leaders are especially
skilful in creating learning organisations and
fostering the development of communities of
learning. Improvement-focused leaders thought-
fully attend to their own growth, modelling a
lifelong commitment to learning.”
Conclusion and Recommendations
From this study it can be established that principals
can make significant contribution to schools’
achieving the educational goals and improving
learner performance, if they are adequately pre-
pared for their leadership role. This can be
achieved by ensuring that aspiring and practicing
principals are exposed to structured CPD pro-
grammes, based on needs analysis. For principals
to cope with the demands of the 21st century,
innovative leadership development programmes
help prepare school leaders to apply creative app-
roaches that address the broader roles and
responsibilities of leaders and the purpose of
schooling, and to use core technologies to achieve
intended outcomes. Participating in structured CPD
programmes will enable principals to make
autonomous decisions, adapt teaching programmes
to local needs, promoting teamwork among teach-
ers, and engaging in teacher monitoring, evaluation
and professional development. CPD programmes
empower them to set strategic direction and
develop school plans and goals, and to monitor
progress by using data to improve practice.
 South African Journal of Education, Volume 37, Number 1, February 2017
Three pertinent issues regarding changes to
professional development of principals come to the
fore. Lewin’s change theory of freezing, moving
and refreezing framed this study appropriately.
Firstly, serious consideration should be given to the
professionalisation of principalship by redefining
the promotion criteria (unfreezing). All participants
acknowledged that principals and aspiring prin-
cipals should be well-prepared to take up lead-
ership and management positions. Secondly, to
support principals and aspiring school managers to
become effective leaders and managers in South
Africa, the DoE piloted an ACE course aimed at
developing leadership and management com-
petence for those in school leadership positions or
those aspiring to such leadership positions (un-
freezing). This professional qualification has now
been replaced by the Advanced Diploma in
Education (ADE). The desired outcome of the ADE
course is to provide participants with relevant
knowledge and skills to develop and implement
school development plans; draw appropriate poli-
cies in line with national legislation and regulations
to guide their practices, as well as set up
mechanisms to deal with issues across all aspects of
school management and leadership. This ADE
qualification is practice-based, and is aimed at
providing management and leadership support
through a variety of interactive programmes that
improve the students’ practice, professional growth
and ethos of leadership. School leaders and man-
agers should be made aware of what is expected of
them through the Norms and Standards of
Educators, competencies and the expectations of
the DoE (Naidu & Conley, 2005). The ADE
qualification should be made a prerequisite for
anyone aspiring to take up leadership positions in
schools (moving). Thirdly, the IQMS policy should
be reviewed, accepted by all stakeholders, and
seriously implemented. Perhaps the performance
management dimension of IQMS should be com-
pletely detached from the policy to allow pro-
fessional development to form the crux of IQMS.
The education district offices should play a more
constructive role in promoting professional de-
velopment for principals, SMT members and
teachers. The budgets for professional development
should be substantially increased, so that experts
and specialists in all facets of education can be
employed. Principals and SGBs should not be
entirely dependent on the DoE for the professional
development of the principal and staff at their
schools. The SGB should set aside funds to
accommodate the professional development of
principals and teaching staff. The Development
Support Teams should identify the needs of
teachers and the principal, and recommend as well
as implement individual and group professional
development programmes. Schools should be
encouraged to strengthen professional learning
9
communities within schools and engage with those
who need to change their practice.
Note
i. Published under a Creative Commons Attribution
Licence.
References
Bloch G 2009. The toxic mix: What’s wrong with South
Africa’s schools and how to fix it. Cape Town,
South Africa: Tafelberg.
Botha RJ 2004. Excellence in leadership: demands on the
professional school principal. South African
Journal of Education, 24(3):239–243. Available at
http://www.ajol.info/index.php/saje/article/view/24
995/20678. Accessed 8 October 2016.
Bottery M 2016. Educational leadership for a more
sustainable world. London, UK: Bloomsbury
Academic.
Bush T 2005. Preparation for school leadership in the
21st century: International perspectives. Keynote
paper presented at the First HEAD Research
Conference, Oslo, June. Available at
https://www.bi.no/cemFiles/Tony%20Bush%20NO
RWAY%20KEYNOTE%20PAPER%202005.pdf.
Accessed 12 October 2016.
Bush T & Heystek J 2006. School leadership and
management in South Africa: principals’
perceptions. International Studies in Educational
Administration, 34(3):63–76.
Bush T, Kiggundu E & Moorosi P 2011. Preparing new
principals in South Africa: the ACE: School
leadership programme. South African Journal of
Education, 31(1):31–43. Available at
http://www.sajournalofeducation.co.za/index.php/s
aje/article/view/356/236. Accessed 11 October
2016.
Bush T & Oduro GKT 2006. New principals in Africa:
preparation, induction and practice. Journal of
Educational Administration, 44(4):359–375. doi:
10.1108/09578230610676587
Craft A 2000. Continuing professional development. A
practical guide for teachers and schools (2nd ed).
London, UK: RoutledgeFalmer.
Creswell JW 2007. Qualitative inquiry & research
design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Creswell JW 2014. Research design: Qualitative,
quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th
ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
Darling-Hammond L & Richardson N 2009. Teacher
learning: What matters? Educational Leadership,
66(5):46–53.
Day C & Sachs J 2004. International handbook on the
continuing professional development of teachers.
Berkshire, UK: Open University Press.
Department of Basic Education (DBE), Republic of
South Africa 2014. The South African Standard for
Principalship. Government Gazette, No. 37897. 7
August. Pretoria: DBE. Available at
http://www.gov.za/sites/www.gov.za/files/37897_g
en636.pdf. Accessed 12 October 2016.
Department of Education (DoE) 1996. Report of the task
team on education management development.
Pretoria, South Africa: Government Printer.
DoE 2004. South African National Professional
Qualification for Principalship (SANPQP).
10
Directorate: Education Management and
Governance Development. Concept paper,
September.
Education Labour Relations Council (ELRC) 2003.
Integrated Quality Management System. Centurion,
South Africa: ELRC.
Fleisch B 2008. Primary education in crisis: Why South
African schoolchildren underachieve in reading
and mathematics. Cape Town, South Africa: Juta
& Co., Ltd.
Friedman A & Phillips M 2004. Continuing professional
development: Developing a vision. Journal of
Education and Work, 17(3):361–376. doi:
10.1080/1363908042000267432
Gall M, Gall JP & Borg WR 2003. Educational
research: An introduction (7th ed). Boston, MA:
Allyn & Bacon.
Goslin KG 2009. How instructional leadership is
conveyed by high school principals: the findings of
three case studies? A paper presented at the
International Congress for School Effectiveness
and Improvement, Canada.
Guskey TR 2002. Professional development and teacher
change. Teachers and Teaching Practice,
8(3):381–391. doi: 10.1080/135406002100000512
Hirsch S 2009. A new definition. Journal of Staff
Development (JSD), 30(4):10–16. Available at
http://dropoutprevention.org/wp-
content/uploads/2015/07/HirshNewDefinition_201
00216.pdf. Accessed 3 September 2016.
Heystek J 2016. African perspectives. In P Pashiardis &
O Johansson (eds). Successful school leadership:
International perspectives. London, UK:
Bloomsbury.
Joseph M 2011. ANAs: No surprise. Naptosa notes.
Gauteng Newsletter, 4(1):1–2.
Kallaway P 2009. No time to fiddle as education is
burning. Stop using band-aid solutions in schools.
Naptosa Insight, 3(2):2–4.
Kinney P 2009. Instructional practices. Principal
Leadership, 9(7):48–51.
Kvale S 2007. Doing interviews. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications Ltd.
Lincoln YS & Guba EG 1985. Naturalistic inquiry.
London, UK: Sage Publications.
Mandela N 1994. Long walk to freedom. New York, NY:
Little, Brown and Company.
McLay M & Brown M 2003. Using concept mapping to
evaluate the training of primary school leaders.
International Journal of Leadership Education,
6(1):73–87. doi: 10.1080/1360312022000069978
Mestry R & Grobler BR 2004. The training and
development of principals to manage schools
effectively using the competence approach.
International Studies in Educational
Administration, 32(3):2–19.
Mestry R & Singh P 2007. Continuing professional
development for principals: a South African
perspective. South African Journal of Education,
27(3):477–490. Available at
http://www.sajournalofeducation.co.za/index.php/s
aje/article/view/112/35. Accessed 11 October 2016.
Murphy J, Elliot SN, Goldring E & Porter AC 2007.
Leadership for learning: a research-based model
and taxonomy of behaviors. School Leadership &
Management, 27(2):179–201. doi:
10.1080/13632430701237420
Mestry
Naidu A & Conley L 2005. Understanding leadership in
a South African context. Study Guide: Module 1.
Johannesburg, South Africa: University of
Johannesburg.
OECD 2010. Improving schools: Strategies for action in
Mexico. Paris, France: OECD Publishing.
Available at
http://www.oecd.org/edu/school/47101323.pdf.
Accessed 17 October 2016.
Piggot-Irvine E 2010. Appraising performance
productively: Integrating accountability and
development. Auckland, New Zealand: Eversleigh
Publishing.
Piggot-Irvine E, Howse J & Richard V 2013. South
Africa principal role and development needs.
International Studies in Educational
Administration, 41(3):55–72.
Queen-Mary TN & Mtapuri O 2014. Teachers’
perceptions of the Integrated Quality Management
System: lessons from Mpumalanga, South Africa.
South African Journal of Education, 34(1): Art.
#719, 14 pages. doi: 10.15700/201412120945
Quong T 2006. Asking the hard questions: being a
beginning principal in Australia. Journal of
Educational Administration, 44(4):376–388. doi:
10.1108/09578230610676622
Republic of South Africa 1998. Employment of
Educators Act No. 76 of 1998. Pretoria:
Government Printers.
Robbins SP & Judge AT 2010. Essentials of
organisational behaviour (10th ed). Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Roe WH & Drake TJ 1980. The principalship (2nd ed).
New York, NY: Macmillan.
Russell D & Cranston N 2012. An examination of
professional development offerings for school
leaders in one large education system. Leading and
Managing, 18(1):1–18.
South African Council for Educators (SACE) 2013. The
CPTD management system handbook. Pretoria,
South Africa: SACE. Available at
http://www.sace.org.za/upload/files/CPTD%20Han
dbook.pdf. Accessed 20 April 2016.
Schleicher A (ed.) 2012. Preparing teachers and
developing school leaders for the 21st Century:
Lessons from around the world. Paris, France:
OECD Publishing. Available at
https://www.oecd.org/site/eduistp2012/49850576.p
df. Accessed 17 October 2016.
Senge P, Kleiner A, Roberts C, Ross R, Roth G & Smith
B 1999. The dance of change: The challenges of
sustaining momentum in learning organizations.
London, UK: Nicholas Brealey Publishing.
Senior B 2002. Organisational change (2nd ed). Harlow,
UK: Financial Times/Prentice Hall Books.
Shenton AK 2004. Strategies for ensuring
trustworthiness in qualitative research projects.
Education for Information, 22(2):63–75.
Spaull N 2013. South Africa’s Education Crisis: The
quality of education in South Africa 1994–2011.
Report Commissioned by the Centre for
Development & Enterprise (CDE). Available at
http://www.section27.org.za/wp-
content/uploads/2013/10/Spaull-2013-CDE-report-
South-Africas-Education-Crisis.pdf. Accessed 19
April 2016.
 South African Journal of Education, Volume 37, Number 1, February 2017
Starr K 2009. Confronting leadership challenges: Major
imperatives for change in Australian education. In
NC Cranston & LC Ehrich (eds). Australian school
leadership today. Bowen Hills, Australia:
Australian Academic Press.
Steyn GM 2002. The changing principalship in South
African schools. Educare, 31(1&2):251–274.
Available at
http://uir.unisa.ac.za/bitstream/handle/10500/232/ar
_steyn_changingprincipalship.pdf?sequence=1&is
Allowed=y. Accessed 9 October 2016.
Steyn GM 2009. Using reflexive photography to study a
principal’s experiences of the impact of
professional development on a school: a case study.
Koers, 74(3):437–465. Available at
http://www.scielo.org.za/pdf/koers/v74n3/04.pdf.
Accessed 9 October 2016.
The Wallace Foundation 2013. The school principal as
leader: Guiding schools to better teaching and
learning. New York, NY: The Wallace Foundation.
Available at
http://www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledge-
center/Documents/The-School-Principal-as-
Leader-Guiding-Schools-to-Better-Teaching-and-
Learning-2nd-Ed.pdf. Accessed 9 August 2016.
11
Thurlow M, Bush T & Coleman M (eds.) 2003.
Leadership and strategic management in South
African schools. London, UK: Commonwealth
Secretariat.
Townsend T & MacBeath J (eds.) 2011. International
handbook of leadership for learning (Part 1). New
York, NY: Springer.
Tucker MS & Codding JB 2002. Preparing principals in
the age of accountability. In MS Tucker & JB
Codding (eds). The principal challenge: Leading
and managing schools in an era of accountability.
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Van der Westhuizen P & Van Vuuren H 2007.
Professionalising principalship in South Africa.
South African Journal of Education, 27(3):431–
445. Available at
http://www.sajournalofeducation.co.za/index.php/s
aje/article/view/118/32. Accessed 9 October 2016.
Van der Westhuizen PC (ed.) 2002. Schools as
organisations (2nd ed). Pretoria, South Africa: Van
Schaik.
Walker A & Qian H 2006. Beginning principals:
balancing at the top of the greasy pole. Journal of
Educational Administration, 44(4):297–309. doi:
10.1108/09578230610674921